How long is dotman ont norty step?

He's not on it anymore as of today.

I want a go. I heard there's a packet of crinkle crunch in arms reach of the step....

Just who do I have to call a cunt then?

knobmeup wrote:
I don't believe cunt calling is a requirement

psketti wrote:
I think being a cunt is the requirement.

So the only way to the step is by being a cunt?

Sounds like too much effort

hugorune wrote:
The same reason that you didn't pm me with your critique of my topic. This is a message forum and I thought a number of people might wish to comment on it or at least read the response that I got.

Am all for convos like this op being in public. Them thats interested can take part, them that ain't don't have to.

So in answer to the original question, it would seem that yes, you can ask why ....... was banned!

i-baster wrote:
Why, who exactly are you suggesting should have slain me?











See -that's an example of one of your games (like the comment about IQ for eg) - accidentally on purpose misinterpreting, in order to twist others' obvious meaning, so that you can either attempt to ridicule, or play the injured party.

knobmeup wrote:
One (IMO) really good thing about a forum I used to post on (before some twat took it over and it went down the tubes) was a specific stickied moderation thread.

The idea was that when any major moderation action was taken (e.g. a banning) a post was made explaining what had been done and why. If people wished to comment, they did so on that thread. I thought it was a good idea because it was very transparent, made it very clear why someone had been banned and restricted any discussion to one place people could choose to interact with. I think it would be a good idea for here.

dogsmilk wrote:
Nice idea. One tweak though for this place, it'd be a thread for discussing conclusions reached. Reaching each decision should perhaps be a thread of it's own, perhaps in community chat, as we have a general tendency to discuss such issues 'at length' and it'd become hugest thread on here otherwise!

Gilly wrote:
You are not a dragon or anything. I was just pointing out that if acting dumb were reason to ban then, in my opinion, you would be a contender for such an action.









Actually I was attempting to understand the rather lame answer I got. I asked about a banned member and it wasn't ever really answered until psketti came in to announce the apparent turnaround from ban to suspension.

i-baster wrote:
If thats a suggestion that we're not being truthful in regards to RA you can take it back right now.

Its EXACTLY as I said it was.

Fuck all to do with a turnaround!

I was not doubting your honesty. I just didn't get told that until you posted. The mods before that posted either without knowledge of the facts or they just didn't share the facts. He was as far as anybody knew until then banned.

i-baster wrote:
You've been here long enough, have a guess...

There are no mods here either.

i-baster wrote:
Fair enough, although it was the use of the words 'apparent' and 'turnaround' which made it appear as if that's what you were doing.

It's down to the each mod individually to state when something like this occurs and it didn't this time, hence the confusion and I apologize for that on this occasion. I'll make sure from here on in that it doesn't happen in the future.

Dogs and oi's ideas further up, sounds workable.

My choice of words was not meant to imply anything underhand. I think the idea about a topic for such decisions is a good idea. I think that would be good for the community.


And to oi saying there are no mods here I say a rose by any other name and all that.

i-baster wrote:
Yo, i-baster, how are you mate? Sorry I left early last night , but I had to be up early.

Do you see anyone on here entitled moderator? There is no spoon ...................

You have my sympathy for that. I hate getting up early too but either work or kids usually make sure I don't sleep in much.

So no mods means society will crumble and anarchy shall rise?